Search Decisions

Decision Text

NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2115 14
Original file (NR2115 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied
DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
Joi S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001
ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2499

TOR
Docket No: 2115-14
23 March 2015

 

 

This is in reference to your application for correction of your

naval record pursuant to the provisions of Title 10, United
States Code, Section 1552. -

Although your application :was not filed in a timely manner, the
Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of
limitations and consider your application on its merits. A ,
three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records,
sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 ~
March 2015: The names and votes of the members of the panel will
-be furnished upon.request. Your allegations of error ‘and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings ef this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support

thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations,
and policies. ,

_ After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
‘record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
injustice.

You enlisted in the Navy and began a period of active duty in
February 1970. You served for about four months without
disciplinary incident, but on 27 June 1970, you received
nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for absence from your appointed
place of duty, disobedience, and failure to obey a lawful order.
Shortly thereafter, on 11 August 1970, you were convicted by
summary court-martial (SCM) of breaking restriction..

Subsequently, you admitted to using lysergic acid diethylamide
(LSD) prior to entering the Navy. However, your commanding
officer noted that this information was only offered as a means
to Secure a discharge. At that time you were not recommended for
retention or reenlistment. Nonetheless, after waiving your
procedural rights to consult with legal counsel and to present
your case to an administrative discharge board, you were
administratively processed for separation by reason of misconduct
due to fraudulent entry. on-16 September 1970, you were issued
an other than honorable discharge and assigned an RE-4
reenlistment code. ‘

The Board, in its review of your entire record and application,
carefully weighed all potentially mitigating factors, such as
your desire to upgrade your discharge and change your
reentistment code. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant relief in your case.
because of the seriousness of your repetitive misconduct which |
resulted in NUP and SCM. Accordingly, your application has been
denied.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material

regard, it is important to keep.in mind that a presumption of
regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when .
‘applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden
is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable
material error or injustice. : 7

 

Executive Director

Similar Decisions

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5108 14

    Original file (NR5108 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 May 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. On 22 May 1969, you were convicted by SPCM of a 79 day period of UA and sentenced to a $97 forfeiture of pay, reduction to paygrade E-1, confinement...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7097 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7097 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 23 June 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 06564-10

    Original file (06564-10.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 9 March 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 02772-02

    Original file (02772-02.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 November 2002. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. for 14 days and a $20 forfeiture of pay. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR7771 14_Redacted

    Original file (NR7771 14_Redacted.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 17 July 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. In your case, the Board determined that a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record.

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR5903 14

    Original file (NR5903 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 22 May 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2009 | 01728-09

    Original file (01728-09.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 5 January 2010. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice, You’ enlisted in the Navy on 21 November 1968 at age 19. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR1612 14

    Original file (NR1612 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 25 February 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2007 | 07629-07

    Original file (07629-07.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 8 July 2008. your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. About two months later, on 22 March 1968, you received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) for a f our day period of UA. The Board, in its review of your entire record and application, carefully...

  • NAVY | BCNR | CY2014 | NR2180 14

    Original file (NR2180 14.pdf) Auto-classification: Denied

    A.- three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, -Sitting in executive session, .considered your application on .. -11l March 2015. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of...